通过与州人口登记处的生存数据建立联系,提高临床登记数据质量。

IF 3.3 Q2 ONCOLOGY JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1200/CCI.24.00025
Samuel Smith, Kate Drummond, Anthony Dowling, Iwan Bennett, David Campbell, Ronnie Freilich, Claire Phillips, Elizabeth Ahern, Simone Reeves, Robert Campbell, Ian M Collins, Julie Johns, Megan Dumas, Wei Hong, Peter Gibbs, Lucy Gately
{"title":"通过与州人口登记处的生存数据建立联系,提高临床登记数据质量。","authors":"Samuel Smith, Kate Drummond, Anthony Dowling, Iwan Bennett, David Campbell, Ronnie Freilich, Claire Phillips, Elizabeth Ahern, Simone Reeves, Robert Campbell, Ian M Collins, Julie Johns, Megan Dumas, Wei Hong, Peter Gibbs, Lucy Gately","doi":"10.1200/CCI.24.00025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Real-world data (RWD) collected on patients treated as part of routine clinical care form the basis of cancer clinical registries. Capturing accurate death data can be challenging, with inaccurate survival data potentially compromising the integrity of registry-based research. Here, we explore the utility of data linkage (DL) to state-based registries to enhance the capture of survival outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified consecutive adult patients with brain tumors treated in the state of Victoria from the Brain Tumour Registry Australia: Innovation and Translation (BRAIN) database, who had no recorded date of death and no follow-up within the last 6 months. Full name and date of birth were used to match patients in the BRAIN registry with those in the Victorian Births, Deaths and Marriages (BDM) registry. Overall survival (OS) outcomes were compared pre- and post-DL.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 7,346 clinical registry patients, 5,462 (74%) had no date of death and no follow-up recorded within the last 6 months. Of the 5,462 patients, 1,588 (29%) were matched with a date of death in BDM. Factors associated with an increased number of matches were poor prognosis tumors, older age, and social disadvantage. OS was significantly overestimated pre-DL compared with post-DL for the entire cohort (pre- <i>v</i> post-DL: hazard ratio, 1.43; <i>P</i> < .001; median, 29.9 months <i>v</i> 16.7 months) and for most individual tumor types. This finding was present independent of the tumor prognosis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>As revealed by linkage with BDM, a high proportion of patients in a brain cancer clinical registry had missing death data, contributed to by informative censoring, inflating OS calculations. DL to pertinent registries on an ongoing basis should be considered to ensure accurate reporting of survival data and interpretation of RWD outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":51626,"journal":{"name":"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics","volume":"8 ","pages":"e2400025"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving Clinical Registry Data Quality via Linkage With Survival Data From State-Based Population Registries.\",\"authors\":\"Samuel Smith, Kate Drummond, Anthony Dowling, Iwan Bennett, David Campbell, Ronnie Freilich, Claire Phillips, Elizabeth Ahern, Simone Reeves, Robert Campbell, Ian M Collins, Julie Johns, Megan Dumas, Wei Hong, Peter Gibbs, Lucy Gately\",\"doi\":\"10.1200/CCI.24.00025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Real-world data (RWD) collected on patients treated as part of routine clinical care form the basis of cancer clinical registries. Capturing accurate death data can be challenging, with inaccurate survival data potentially compromising the integrity of registry-based research. Here, we explore the utility of data linkage (DL) to state-based registries to enhance the capture of survival outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified consecutive adult patients with brain tumors treated in the state of Victoria from the Brain Tumour Registry Australia: Innovation and Translation (BRAIN) database, who had no recorded date of death and no follow-up within the last 6 months. Full name and date of birth were used to match patients in the BRAIN registry with those in the Victorian Births, Deaths and Marriages (BDM) registry. Overall survival (OS) outcomes were compared pre- and post-DL.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 7,346 clinical registry patients, 5,462 (74%) had no date of death and no follow-up recorded within the last 6 months. Of the 5,462 patients, 1,588 (29%) were matched with a date of death in BDM. Factors associated with an increased number of matches were poor prognosis tumors, older age, and social disadvantage. OS was significantly overestimated pre-DL compared with post-DL for the entire cohort (pre- <i>v</i> post-DL: hazard ratio, 1.43; <i>P</i> < .001; median, 29.9 months <i>v</i> 16.7 months) and for most individual tumor types. This finding was present independent of the tumor prognosis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>As revealed by linkage with BDM, a high proportion of patients in a brain cancer clinical registry had missing death data, contributed to by informative censoring, inflating OS calculations. DL to pertinent registries on an ongoing basis should be considered to ensure accurate reporting of survival data and interpretation of RWD outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51626,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"e2400025\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI.24.00025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI.24.00025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在常规临床治疗过程中收集的患者真实世界数据(RWD)是癌症临床登记的基础。获取准确的死亡数据具有挑战性,不准确的生存数据可能会损害基于登记册的研究的完整性。在此,我们探讨了将数据链接(DL)到基于州的登记处以加强生存结果采集的实用性:方法:我们从澳大利亚脑肿瘤登记处(Brain Tumour Registry Australia:方法:我们从澳大利亚脑肿瘤登记:创新与转化(BRAIN)数据库中筛选出在维多利亚州接受治疗的连续成年脑肿瘤患者,这些患者在过去 6 个月内没有死亡日期记录,也没有随访记录。全名和出生日期用于将 BRAIN 登记中的患者与维多利亚州出生、死亡和婚姻(BDM)登记中的患者进行匹配。比较了DL前后的总生存期(OS)结果:在 7,346 名临床登记患者中,有 5,462 人(74%)在过去 6 个月内没有死亡日期和随访记录。在这 5462 名患者中,有 1588 人(29%)与 BDM 中的死亡日期相匹配。与匹配人数增加相关的因素包括预后不良的肿瘤、年龄偏大和社会处境不利。在整个队列中,DL前的OS明显高于DL后的OS(DL前与DL后:危险比,1.43;P < .001;中位数,29.9个月与16.7个月),大多数单个肿瘤类型的OS也是如此。这一发现与肿瘤预后无关:结论:通过与 BDM 的连接发现,脑癌临床登记处有很大一部分患者的死亡数据缺失,而这是信息性普查造成的,从而提高了 OS 的计算结果。应考虑持续与相关登记处进行 DL 连接,以确保准确报告生存数据和解释 RWD 结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Improving Clinical Registry Data Quality via Linkage With Survival Data From State-Based Population Registries.

Purpose: Real-world data (RWD) collected on patients treated as part of routine clinical care form the basis of cancer clinical registries. Capturing accurate death data can be challenging, with inaccurate survival data potentially compromising the integrity of registry-based research. Here, we explore the utility of data linkage (DL) to state-based registries to enhance the capture of survival outcomes.

Methods: We identified consecutive adult patients with brain tumors treated in the state of Victoria from the Brain Tumour Registry Australia: Innovation and Translation (BRAIN) database, who had no recorded date of death and no follow-up within the last 6 months. Full name and date of birth were used to match patients in the BRAIN registry with those in the Victorian Births, Deaths and Marriages (BDM) registry. Overall survival (OS) outcomes were compared pre- and post-DL.

Results: Of the 7,346 clinical registry patients, 5,462 (74%) had no date of death and no follow-up recorded within the last 6 months. Of the 5,462 patients, 1,588 (29%) were matched with a date of death in BDM. Factors associated with an increased number of matches were poor prognosis tumors, older age, and social disadvantage. OS was significantly overestimated pre-DL compared with post-DL for the entire cohort (pre- v post-DL: hazard ratio, 1.43; P < .001; median, 29.9 months v 16.7 months) and for most individual tumor types. This finding was present independent of the tumor prognosis.

Conclusion: As revealed by linkage with BDM, a high proportion of patients in a brain cancer clinical registry had missing death data, contributed to by informative censoring, inflating OS calculations. DL to pertinent registries on an ongoing basis should be considered to ensure accurate reporting of survival data and interpretation of RWD outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
190
期刊最新文献
Development, Validation, and Clinical Utility of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measure-Enhanced Prediction Models for Overall Survival in Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Receiving Immunotherapy. Metastatic Versus Localized Disease as Inclusion Criteria That Can Be Automatically Extracted From Randomized Controlled Trials Using Natural Language Processing. Identifying Oncology Patients at High Risk for Potentially Preventable Emergency Department Visits Using a Novel Definition. Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Risk Prediction Model Development to Support Cancer Care Delivery: A Scoping Review. Optimizing End Points for Phase III Cancer Trials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1